Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 72 posts

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#11

Post by gregoriol »

JimDabell wrote: post #3

When I buy an iPhone and use iOS, I’m making an active choice to be an Apple user. When I install a third-party app and use it, I’m making an active choice to be their user too. When that third-party app embeds the Facebook SDK which tracks me, I don’t know about it and do not have the ability to consent to Facebook tracking me. ATT brings Facebook to the same level as Apple and the third-party app developers by givi…

If you trust Apple with what they do on your iPhone, you should trust the third-party with what they do inside their app, there is no difference.

If you need to know the details of what is done inside the third-party app, then that third-party is not trustworthy. Or you also need to know what is done inside iOS.

The problem is that in today world, we don't know who we can trust, and that the context might change over time. We all believe that Apple doesn't do shady stuff today, but has anyone proof? and will that change some day?

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#12

Post by realusername »

alistairSH wrote: post #5

Maybe because opting into tracking via "Music" or "Photos" when I've already consented to tracking at the OS level is redundant? There's no unknown 3rd party here - it's all Apple. In the case of apps from the App Store, there are/were 3rd party trackers - I download "Candy Crush" and it sends data to Meta or Google or somebody else.

> I've already consented to tracking at the OS level

Isn't that sentence by itself kind of insane? Tracking at the OS level used to be unacceptable.

Nobody should expect their OS to track them like this in the first place.

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#13

Post by buran77 »

alistairSH wrote: post #5

Maybe because opting into tracking via "Music" or "Photos" when I've already consented to tracking at the OS level is redundant? There's no unknown 3rd party here - it's all Apple. In the case of apps from the App Store, there are/were 3rd party trackers - I download "Candy Crush" and it sends data to Meta or Google or somebody else.

> I've already consented to tracking at the OS level

That's very wide and obscure. Even the bullet points for how the OS can track you go past what can be considered informed consent. If that consent covers every 1st party app that will ever run on the phone then it's a guarantee nothing in about it is really informed.

If you think a vague, blanket consent is all it takes then every company will get one in a jiffy. Just touch any company's real estate in any way whatsoever, get a prompt that "you consented to being tracked in any company related app forever", profit. You "consented".

Remember when Disney tried to get out of a wrongful death lawsuit by citing some agreement the family of the victim accepted for a Disney+ trial years before? [0] Well you're describing the same principle. Consent should be granular.

[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disney-says-man-cant-su...

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#14

Post by Spivak »

realusername wrote: post #12
alistairSH wrote: post #5

Maybe because opting into tracking via "Music" or "Photos" when I've already consented to tracking at the OS level is redundant? There's no unknown 3rd party here - it's all Apple. In the case of apps from the App Store, there are/were 3rd party trackers - I download "Candy Crush" and it sends data to Meta or Google or somebody else.

> I've already consented to tracking at the OS level Isn't that sentence by itself kind of insane? Tracking at the OS level used to be unacceptable. Nobody should expect their OS to track them like this in the first place.

Not saying what's being collected isn't invasive but over time we've redefined spyware and tracking to include logging, error reporting, and telemetry.

Someone in the 90's would be imagining bonzi buddy when you say tracking when it's actually pendo.

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#15

Post by tpm »

JimDabell wrote: post #3

When I buy an iPhone and use iOS, I’m making an active choice to be an Apple user. When I install a third-party app and use it, I’m making an active choice to be their user too. When that third-party app embeds the Facebook SDK which tracks me, I don’t know about it and do not have the ability to consent to Facebook tracking me. ATT brings Facebook to the same level as Apple and the third-party app developers by givi…

> When I buy an iPhone and use iOS, I’m making an active choice to be an Apple user.

At the time of the purchase, at best. If Apple changes their tracking after that and you don't agree with it, what will you do, sell the phone?

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#16

Post by Latty »

Spivak wrote: post #14
realusername wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've already consented to tracking at the OS level Isn't that sentence by itself kind of insane? Tracking at the OS level used to be unacceptable. Nobody should expect their OS to track them like this in the first place.

Not saying what's being collected isn't invasive but over time we've redefined spyware and tracking to include logging, error reporting, and telemetry. Someone in the 90's would be imagining bonzi buddy when you say tracking when it's actually pendo.

Companies have intentionally bucketed those things together with invasive ad tracking so they can obfuscate what the user is agreeing to.

As with GDPR, it's easy to offer a good user experience and do the right things by default, but there is an active choice being made to make it annoying and misleading to try and trick users into doing stuff that is against their own interests.

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#17

Post by realusername »

Spivak wrote: post #14
realusername wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've already consented to tracking at the OS level Isn't that sentence by itself kind of insane? Tracking at the OS level used to be unacceptable. Nobody should expect their OS to track them like this in the first place.

Not saying what's being collected isn't invasive but over time we've redefined spyware and tracking to include logging, error reporting, and telemetry. Someone in the 90's would be imagining bonzi buddy when you say tracking when it's actually pendo.

And what about something like the AdvertisingID? The OS creates an identifier for the purpose of tracking you with ads.

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#18

Post by Spivak »

Latty wrote: post #16
Spivak wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying what's being collected isn't invasive but over time we've redefined spyware and tracking to include logging, error reporting, and telemetry. Someone in the 90's would be imagining bonzi buddy when you say tracking when it's actually pendo.

Companies have intentionally bucketed those things together with invasive ad tracking so they can obfuscate what the user is agreeing to. As with GDPR, it's easy to offer a good user experience and do the right things by default, but there is an active choice being made to make it annoying and misleading to try and trick users into doing stuff that is against their own interests.

Apple isn't, I can turn off ad tracking and keep analytics on.

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#19

Post by dinkblam »

While there is always room for improvement, i think the lack of of proper (crash & debug) analytics being sent home are the only remaining explanation explanation for the abysmal software quality at Apple.

How else could they repeatedly fuck up the basics? Every second release has awful battery life because half the daemon processes are running wild in 100% CPU parties. The only reasonable explanation for this nonsense is that Apple doesn't know about all the problems (or cannot fix them) because they refrain from collecting the required data...

Re: Watchdog ponders why Apple doesn't apply its strict app tracking rules to itself

#20

Post by Latty »

Spivak wrote: post #18
Latty wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies have intentionally bucketed those things together with invasive ad tracking so they can obfuscate what the user is agreeing to. As with GDPR, it's easy to offer a good user experience and do the right things by default, but there is an active choice being made to make it annoying and misleading to try and trick users into doing stuff that is against their own interests.

Apple isn't, I can turn off ad tracking and keep analytics on.

Sure, but the "redefinition" you talk of isn't consumers suddenly being unreasonable, it's the fact they've experienced so much gaslighting and unclear dark patterns they are (reasonably) assuming everything is suspect and rejecting it all.
Post reply on HN